PILC Replacement: Getting the Lead Out Spring Cincinnati, OH April 30, 2003 Page 1
PILC IS GREAT! Low Profile High Fault Current Capability on Shield High Degree of Water Blocking So why shouldn t you use it? Page 2
Why the Move Away From PILC? Fatigue Cracks in the Lead Oil Migration on Slopes EPA Rulings on Lead (#1 Hazardous Material) Comparative Expense Diminishing Installation Expertise Page 3
Replacement Challenges Small Duct Diameters Duct Conditions Cable Operating Temperature Fault Current Capability of Shield Page 4
How to Fit Extruded Dielectric Cables Into Existing Ducts (Without Real Design Changes) Reduce the cable clearance to the duct wall. (Generally recommended minimum is 1/2 ) Reduce the thickness of the extruded jacket. (Some utilities accept a.025 thick jacket over 750 kcmil Cu 25kV Cable) Extrude over compact sector conductors. Page 5
But These Options May Not Always Work Duct clearance should not be reduced to less than 1/2. Ducts are no longer in good condition. Cable may be damaged during pulling. Jacket thickness should not be reduced excessively. Thin jackets may tear rather easily. The benefits of the jacket are then lost. Difficult to extrude over compact sector. Rotation of conductor can cause problems. Costly process. Splicing and terminating may be a problem. Page 6
Primary Objectives Utilize a DRY Cable Design Keep a Low Profile Match Shield to Fault Current Requirement Match Ruggedness of Cable to Duct System Specify an Easy-to-Install Cable Page 7
Utilize a DRY Cable Design Consider the Sheath Material Lead Over Extruded Dielectric Corrugated and Welded Bronze Sealed Corrugated and Folded Copper Tape Use Strand Filling in the Conductor Use Other Water Swellable Components Page 8
Keep a Low Profile Several Methods to Reduce the Cable Diameter Compact the Conductor Reduce the Thickness of Extruded Components (Even the Insulation!) Use Flat Strap Concentric Neutrals Page 9
Match Shield to Fault Current Although lead sheath carries a high fault current, new cable may not need to carry the equivalent rating of the lead sheath. Determine fault requirements to optimize metallic sheath. Over designing the shield will result in increased I 2 R losses. ($$$) Page 10
Match Ruggedness of Cable What is the Condition of Your Ducts? A Thin Wall Jacket May Be Used If It s Tough Enough Consider Toughness and Heat Stability LLDPE, HDPE, Polypropylene Determine Amount of Clearance Required Can it Be Reduced to Less Than ½? Page 11
Specify Easy-to-install Cable Round Conductors vs. Sector Conductor Flexibility is Key Connectability to existing system Consider Pulling Length Page 12
Design Higher Stress Cables A common design practice for HV power cables is to design the cable with a high maximum stress (e.g. EPR 240kV Class @ 10kV/mm) In MV cables, the design operating at the highest voltage stress is the 35kV #1/0 AWG Conductor (4 kv/mm). If the same insulation is used, why NOT design MV cable to a higher stress? Page 13
Electric Stress Variations Within Cable Insulation Conductor Conductor Shield Insulation Insulation Shield Metallic Shield Electric Stress Distribution Within The Insulation Page 14
Calculation of Voltage Stress in Cables S@D x = D x 2.0 x E x LN D d Where: S@D x = Stress at diameter D x, volts/mil E = Voltage across insulation, volts D x = Diameter of interest, mils D = Diameter over insulation, mils d = Diameter over conductor shield, mils Page 15
Reducing the Insulation Thickness Is The Last Step Compact Conductor Use a Flat Strap Neutral Reduce the Jacket Thickness Reduce Thickness of the Conductor and Insulation Shields Reduce Clearance to Duct THEN Reduce the Insulation Thickness Page 16
CABLE DESIGN SELECTION Standard Designs - 15 KV 750 KCM 2.95 INCH OD PILC 3/C 750 KCM 3.50 INCH OD 175 MILS EPR 140 MILS JKT 3-1/C 750 KCM 3.65 INCH OD 175 MILS EPR 80 MILS JKT Page 17
CABLE DESIGN SELECTION Reduced Wall Designs - 15 KV 3/C 750 KCM 2.95 INCH OD PILC 3/C 750 KCM 3.10 INCH OD 125 MILS EPR 120 MILS JKT 3-1/C 750 KCM 3.10 INCH OD 125 MILS EPR 50 MILS JKT 140 MILS EPR 110 MILS JKT Page 18
Testing the Design Testing should show that the proposed design will stand up to the rigors on the installation and operation. Electrical and Mechanical Tests Testing should be at or above proposed operational limits. (AEIC CG11-02 recommends same test level as used on the 100% insulation level.) Page 19
Electrical Testing AC Breakdown Study Ionization Factor AEIC Qualification (As Applicable) Accelerated Water Treeing Testing (AWTT) Accelerated Cable Life Testing (ACLT) Page 20
Mechanical Testing Should replicate the actual installation conditions, or be more severe May include such factors as: Reverse Bends High Sidewall Pressure Small Minimum Bending Radii Several Cycles of Pulls Electrical Testing Should Follow with No Significant Reduction in Electrical Properties Page 21
Page 22
Reduced Insulation Wall Summary In Use for Over Ten Years Tested with Accessories A Definite Design Alternative for Tight Duct Situations Page 23
Accessories In general, premolded accessories may not pass corona tests when installed on reduced insulation thickness cables. Cold-shrink and heat-shrink accessories should pass electrical tests. Trifurcating splices are available. Electrical Stress on Reduced Insulation Wall Cables Must Be Controlled at Both Conductor Shield and Insulation Shield Interfaces. Page 24
Accessories Joint size should allow installation in existing smaller manholes. Cold-shrink terminations can be used to replace potheads. Compression connectors can be used to shape sector conductors. Should be qualified to IEEE Std. 404. Page 25
Summary & Conclusions Overall cable design is more important than any individual component. Complete redesign not always necessary. Several types of shields are available. High temperature jackets should be considered. Reduced Insulation Wall Is a Viable Option Page 26
Summary & Conclusions Properly designed PILC replacement cables have been found to be both electrically and mechanically suitable for installation and operation on utility network systems. Whatever the design chosen: There should be no significant change in the electrical and physical properties when comparing the reduced wall samples to the full wall samples. There should be no significant change in the electrical and physical properties after severe mechanical conditioning. Page 27